Me and Vito will handle security.






Carl

 

Glad to. YOU manage expectations by stating facts that are so skewed, that they border on outright lies. Bill and others have outlined to you some examples. The fact that you are either a rep or a high up DALPA insider makes it shameful and inexcusable. I sincerely hope you keep doing it though. People who are on the fence about an in-house union need to keep hearing from high up DALPA people like yourself. They need to hear you in your own words.

Typical example of one of your dodges. You do nothing but try to show flawed examples of how we Delta pilots cannot expect to make the gains of other airlines because those airlines are in different "industries" or have different business models. This is clear lowering of expectations. Yet you say you are confused as to how you can be accused of this because you don't know the expectations of one poster.

This level of duplicitous behavior is easy to spot slowplay. Trust me...I'm not the only one who notices. Please continue though.

Carl

 

His use of TACA was absurd. It was a great example of illustrating YOUR absurdity, by using absurdity. Too bad you can only recognize other people's absurdity...even when it's being used to illustrate your own.

Yes you have mentioned all those carriers. You've said we need to compare ourselves to Unical, and LCC and others like AMR. You've specifically stated that we can't use LUV because they have a totally different business model. You've specifically stated that we can't use UPS and FDX because you say they're in different industries.

The fact that you say this as a high up union official is what troubles so many. You're not just one guy with one vote. You and your opinions are running our union.

Scary stuff.

Carl

 

Here is the response I received from my friend over at Ryan Air. It looks like it would be hard for a pilot to make over 200k USD regularly. I also am glad I don't work for O'Leary, not to say some of the perks of the airline aren't there...que up more calender pics

At Ryanair we have absolutely no perks what so ever, except free jump seating. That means no retirement, no insurance (covered in europe by the governments anyway), etc etc. Even when going for the simulator every 6 months, we have to pay for the hotels ourselves. Ryanair say that they pay more then other airlines so they don't have to hire anybody to deal with these things. In reality, pay has decreased every year since I got here. In other words, Ryanair does not reward experience, but only money is on the table. People have accepted this previously, because there have been continued fast growth here which means an upgrade is possible in the 737-800 very quickly, and that is of course more pay then as an FO. We have no pay scales that adjust to years of service. Instead the pay varies according to where you are based. Mr O'leary who is running the show, has had a policy to decrease pay and conditions (days off, paid hotels etc) for every new base opened. We now have close to 50 bases I think, all over Europe. As we have been unsuccessful in convincing everybody that a union is a good thing, this is how it is being on ones own.
It is not so bad working here as the people are great, the flying is fun, professional, and quite challenging at times, and the cabin crew is young, fun and good looking (sometimes not), but looking at our working contract - it is horrible. Currently people are leaving here at the rate of about 30 pilots a month.
As for the money, last year I made about €110.000 ($154,275) gross as a captain here in the 737-800 for almost 4 years.
The taxes are low in Ireland, and it is easy to deduct taxes when not being based there (Im based in Norway), so the tax rate for me is only about 10%..
If you have any more questions, let me know, and good luck with the negotiations!

 

Not the IPA at UPS. Management hates their pilots. The relationship is bad, yet the IPA still pulled off the best stuff in the industry. How could they have done that based on your obviously flawed premise.

Carl

 

Tell me again about UPS's profitability...I didn't mention FedEx either. They are very profitable as well. Thanks for allowing me to explain, Groundskeeper.

 

Carl, that's not correct. I specifically stated that LUV and FedEx will be in the contract comparison. I have stated my belief that FDX and UPS are highly profitable companies in a rational duopoly. They are a different industry (overnight package express) whose pilots do the same job we do. LUV is in the same industry with a different business model. They should and will be included as a comparable.

 

ALPA or DPA, for the next contract my priorities are:

1. Scope

2. Pay

3. QOL

4. the Rest

Allow me to coin a "new" acronym: SPQR

By Scope, I mean we take seats back. Status quo would be a fail. We have to change our mentality from scoping out flying, to scoping in more flying. I'm looking for current DCI contracts to be allowed to expire and recapturing anything over 50 seats. Scope must include language for JVs and partnerships of various kinds. Boeing ought to have taught all of us the true value of outsourcing your product - it destroys it. Aligning our brand to include the RJs has, among other things, confused our customers with our carry-on baggage policy so that countless of our mainline customers leave their bags planeside with meds and other need items not to be returned to them until they reach their final (often international) destination. This result alone ought to convince our management to distinguish the mainline product.

Anyway, I'm thinking I'm going Roman for the next contract (notwithstanding Italy's current debt crisis). SPQR!

 

Slow you did say these things, and quite recently but, in the past you have said the things Carl is saying.

Will AF/KLM be included in the comparison?

 

Are all those DALPA higher ups that you surround yourself with so easily swayed by your obvious changing of the subject? Do you really think that nobody remembers what you said previously? This is sad. Here is what you said once again:

Nowhere in the premise of your post do you discuss profitability...do you. Your thesis (as bolded above) is that "old-school" tough unions have lower pay rates. An obvious falsehood. When I call you out on it by reminding you of UPS, you quickly change your premise to profitability.

Don't you see how weak this makes you look? When I get things wrong, I apologize and thank the poster for setting me straight. That's what anyone should do. Not spin and contort because you are so insecure, you can't admit a mistake.

Carl